Currently, IVR systems interact with users to execute tasks desired by the user. For example, a user can call a bank that uses an IVR system to allow for multiple user tasks. The IVR system can output menu options for a user to select from regarding the purpose of the user's call. For example, “press or say 1 for account balance,” “press or say 2 for customer service,” and “press or say 3 for location and hours.”
IVR systems can include complex sets of menus to, for example, allow users to complete complex tasks. For example, an IVR system can allow a user to order a part for a vehicle, or book a flight to a particular location at a particular time.
Some IVR system transactions result in successful completion of the task desired by the user. Some IVR system transactions result in escalation to an agent to complete the task, e.g., an unsuccessful completion. The path taken by the IVR system for a given transaction (e.g., the IVR journey) can be different for two users using the same IVR system, desiring to complete the same task. In some scenarios, for two users using the same IVR system, desiring to complete the same task, one user's transaction can be successful while the other user's transaction can be unsuccessful. It can be desirable to review IVR transaction logs to determine one or more parameters that can contribute to optimization of IVR systems.
Current review of IVR transaction logs can include a human analyzer reading through the transaction logs and coming to a conclusion regarding reasons for success or failure of the IVR transaction based on, for example, their own knowledge. The human analyzer may have to read through many logs to come to a conclusion. In some scenarios, the number of logs that the human analyzer may read through to come to a conclusion can be so large that the human analyzer does not make an accurate conclusion. This current method can be inaccurate, not reproducible, and fail to yield results that can be used by the IVR system to improve IVR system performance.